RECENT ADVANCES IN ZOOLOGY. 283 
Let me turn aside for one moment to point out two results, 
the one of practical, the other of philosophical interest, which 
flowed from this new classification. And I take them in the order 
of first practical, and next philosophical, because it is thus that 
they have affected men’s minds. 
The practical result is this, that teachers are not now satisfied 
with making their students either botanists or zoologists; they 
attempt to make them biologists; that is to say, they endeavour 
to make them acquainted first of all with the characteristic 
phenomena of Living Matter, and that it is in the second place 
only that they direct their attention to Animals, as such, or 
Plants, as such.- And the philosophical result, as has been so well 
pointed out by Mr. Geddes in his recent article on ‘ Morphology,’ 
is this—we have returned to Linneus’ first conception of the 
classification of the material world; we think now of Organized 
things on the one hand, and of Non-organized on the other. The 
relation of Animals and Plants is recognised to be closer than it 
is supposed to be for the last century; and the formal reason 
has been to be found in the fact that both Animals and Plants 
have ancestors common to themselves, but not common also to 
Minerals; these ancestors are to be sought for among the 
Protista. 
Prof. Haeckel has quite recently extended and formulated 
this view by uniting together into the group of Histiota all 
Animals and Plants that form tissues or cell-aggregates, urging 
that the difference between Protista and Histiota is greater than 
that between Animals and Plants. This is a view expressed too 
lately to come within the purview of acknowledged advances, but 
it is one that will, no doubt, be first of all hotly debated, and, 
later on, silently accepted. 
So far, indeed, as Animals are concerned the principle of the 
matter was yielded ten years ago; for it is now but a few months 
more than a decade that Prof. Huxley read to the Linnean Society 
an essay on the classification of the Animal Kingdom. Allow me, 
before we go further, to remind you that Prof. Huxley is one of 
those generals who do not fight far in advance of their base; or, 
in other words, that the systematic generalizations which he 
proposes or accepts have always behind them a very solid array 
of well-matured facts. Ten years ago, then, Prof. Huxley dis- 
tinguished between such animals as never formed tissues, and 
